Personal Energy Independence

[Olaf Hart]

There is an ice shelf in Antarctica that is moving a lot faster than predicted.
Some bright spark has been doing cores and reckons the shelf is actually sitting on water, there is volcanic activity down there melting the ice at the bottom of the shelf.
So there is a wild card...

[BeauV]

Folks, we'll all be dead by the time the sea level rises much if one only considers the absolute increase in the sea level. We're talking about flooding that gets really ugly in 2100. Our grand children's kids will be the ones treading water. Of course, by then the temperature will be climbing even more rapidly, assuming we do diddly squat about it. The difficulty surrounds two things:

1) a very small rise in sea level (like 12 inches) in a state like Florida is irritating when there is calm weather, but it's devastating when combined with a storm surge and high tide. Keep in mind, the mean altitude of Florida is 100 feet (source) but there are many many square miles that are only a few feet above high tide now. Another example is imagine the sea water than inundates place along the east coast being a food higher. A giant piece of New York and huge areas of the shore of Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia already flooded. Another foot probably means many more square miles flooded. But you'll find a way to figure this out for yourself in the next point. NOAA has built a tool for us.

2) The predictions of the rate of ice loss from a decade ago are turning out to be incorrect, by a lot. The ice is melting much faster than forecast. One of the most difficult problems is that the tundra in Siberia and N. Canada is thawing. When that happens, a very large quantity of methane gets released and things really take off. It's starting now. As a result NOAA (probably the most credible groups around) has been forced to alter their forecasts quite regularly. They have a really cool interactive tool here that you can use to check out your own area. Based on the much more rapid melting rate, they had to update this twice in the last ten years. The most recent update was because the measured melting rate was about twice as fast as forecast.

As to the air holding more water and the sea level going down. That's simply not good science from everything I can find. Here's a simple way to think about it. Without a doubt the air can hold a LOT more water at a higher temperature. But we're talking about 3-6 deg C increase causing most of the ice to melt. If we assume that the average temperature goes up 6 deg. C, which it hasn't, you can see from the graph below that the water carrying capacity isn't increased by nearly enough to deal with the 20-30 inches of water across 70% of the globe.

I don't know for sure what the average temp of all the air on the planet is, but it's going to be darned cold as about half the atmosphere is above 5,000 feet and it's much cooler up there. But in any event, look at that graph in the temperature areas we're talking about. BTW, [url=The average temperature on Earth is about 33.6 F (0.9 C)]this source[/url] says the average temperature of the Earth at the surface is 0.9 deg C. If we take the temperature up to 4 deg C, and ignore that this is the temperature at the surface. We still only get an ability of the air to hold moisture that is smaller than the thickness of the line on the graph. The math just doesn't work.

[Ish]

It's not just the ice melting, it's the land that was under the ice rebounding. I'm at a comfortable distance above any projection of rise, so I will never have waterfront unless I move. Sometime in the next couple thousand years should be safe.

[BeauV]

There is an ice shelf in Antarctica that is moving a lot faster than predicted.
Some bright spark has been doing cores and reckons the shelf is actually sitting on water, there is volcanic activity down there melting the ice at the bottom of the shelf.
So there is a wild card...

I read about that. I was amazed. It's interesting to think about a volcano under an ice sheet and what that would do. There could be millions of gallons of water trapped under the ice. Releasing that could cause some pretty major waves.

While pondering Greenland, do consider that if one dumps that much ice cold fresh water on top of the relatively warmer salt water of the N. Atlantic, it's going to have a BIG weather impact. I think that impact will probably be a lot larger than folks like to think about. The temperature of places downstream of the Gulf Stream could become a LOT colder.

[TheOffice]

Of course, if Yellowstone ever blows, everyone to the east is screwed.

[Olaf Hart]

Larry, my understanding is that Tesla forecast a flat to small growth rate for the Model X and S. They were pleasantly surprised by an uptick in demand. Stories abound, but I think what has happened is their initial buying binge was classic "early adopter" folks like us; we're willing to try stuff pretty close to the bleeding edge. Then, there is supposed to be a chasm (you know, as in "Crossing the Chasm"). What appears to have really happened is sales were moderate last year on the older/larger models and they've now crossed Chasm and the classic early majority buyers are picking them up. This logic matches most new tech adoption, but has accelerated the chasm crossing part by about 18 months.

The other serious issue Tesla faces is finding enough labor. They are hiring anyone with a pulse and running the factory three shifts. They've also sold way more cars than originally planned, so they're running two shifts at most service centers and have added a heap of SuperChargers in addition to their base 2016 plan for this year.

Finally, we're now seeing Model 3 Teslas showing up like toad stools after a rain. Six months ago we saw one a month. Now we see three a week. Of course, they sold a lot of the early production units to their employees and earliest customers, so they could get friendly feedback. As a result, we probably see a lot more of them that most folks. But, as an example, during a drive back from Lake Tahoe a few weeks ago I spotted 14 Model 3s in a 4 hour drive. That would have been 2 or 3 six months ago.

I don't know if I mentioned it, but my daughter finally let me drive her Model 3. It's a GREAT car in every way. I've driven this years BMW 335i and the Tesla kills it on almost every point. Ride, noise level, interior design, etc.... They are very similar cars in size and capacity with the Tesla being about $5k cheaper.

Interesting perspective on electric cars, all is not as it seems in the real world

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-07/f ... la/9461096

[LarryHoward]

Larry, my understanding is that Tesla forecast a flat to small growth rate for the Model X and S. They were pleasantly surprised by an uptick in demand. Stories abound, but I think what has happened is their initial buying binge was classic "early adopter" folks like us; we're willing to try stuff pretty close to the bleeding edge. Then, there is supposed to be a chasm (you know, as in "Crossing the Chasm"). What appears to have really happened is sales were moderate last year on the older/larger models and they've now crossed Chasm and the classic early majority buyers are picking them up. This logic matches most new tech adoption, but has accelerated the chasm crossing part by about 18 months.

The other serious issue Tesla faces is finding enough labor. They are hiring anyone with a pulse and running the factory three shifts. They've also sold way more cars than originally planned, so they're running two shifts at most service centers and have added a heap of SuperChargers in addition to their base 2016 plan for this year.

Finally, we're now seeing Model 3 Teslas showing up like toad stools after a rain. Six months ago we saw one a month. Now we see three a week. Of course, they sold a lot of the early production units to their employees and earliest customers, so they could get friendly feedback. As a result, we probably see a lot more of them that most folks. But, as an example, during a drive back from Lake Tahoe a few weeks ago I spotted 14 Model 3s in a 4 hour drive. That would have been 2 or 3 six months ago.

I don't know if I mentioned it, but my daughter finally let me drive her Model 3. It's a GREAT car in every way. I've driven this years BMW 335i and the Tesla kills it on almost every point. Ride, noise level, interior design, etc.... They are very similar cars in size and capacity with the Tesla being about $5k cheaper.

Interesting perspective on electric cars, all is not as it seems in the real world

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-07/f ... la/9461096

I’d say it is as it is on analysis, not necessarily as wished by some.

Bottom line is that moving a vehicle takes power and that power comes from some fuel with efficiency and transmission losses. Whether we suck oil out of the ground, refine it, ship and store it and pump it into a tank or build a distribution grid that takes electricity from some source (fossil, wind, solar, hydro, etc) and store it in a battery, it takes a certain amount of work to turn the tires. Fossil generates a good deal, but not all, of its pollution at consumption - right out of the tailpipe. Not so good for crowded urban areas with stagnant air masses. Hybrid captures excess energy for segments of no emission use. Plug in electrics allow the pollution to occur somewhere else, perhaps someplace more easily mitigated or, like Tasmania and hydro, some generation with lower impact - unless you are a spawning fish climbing a dammed river. Batteries bring their own toxic metal disposal issues. We recycle “disposable”batteries.

Plenty of debate on efficient, centralized grid managed for cost and emission reductions. Equal debate on decentralized generation with grid support at surge and anything in between. No perfect solutions. “Zero emission vehicles” don’t really exist.

[kimbottles]

>............................“Zero emission vehicles” don’t really exist.

I would argue that my various bicycles come pretty close to Zero Emissions.......

[LarryHoward]

>............................“Zero emission vehicles” don’t really exist.

I would argue that my various bicycles come pretty close to Zero Emissions.......

If you ignore the carbon emitted in growing, transporting and cooking your food that might be close. We also never seem to capture the environmental costs of the raw materials and manufacturing that goes into our various forms of transport.

I’m a big believer in the fact that each of us has an environmental impact and we can’t hide from it by getting energy from a plug in the wall as opposed to a pump at the gas station. Minimizing the impact where we can and making trades (ev’s make huge sense in the urban enclaves) is wise but we shouldn’t fool ourselves that cap and trade and other mechanisms makes any of us “carbon neutral”. By sheer mass, we have a tremendous impact on the earth.

[Orestes Munn]

Bicycles reduce emissions in as much as they replace other, dirtier, forms of transportation. Otherwise, the manufacturing and delivery costs of the things and all the kit you need to run and fix them, plus all the tires, chains, cogs, lube, degreasers, clothing, and extra food they consume, not to mention driving to races and stuff, make them far dirtier toys than semi-auto rifles and almost as bad as sailboats.

Again, Rich, what kind of panels are your people installing?

[BeauV]

Comparing any Corolla to any Tesla is absurd and stupid.

It would roughly the same level of absurdity if one compared a BMW 750i or MBZ 550 SL with the Corolla. The Tesla is a luxury sedan or SUBV that will haul 5 people to 60 MPH faster than a Corvette, indeed one tenth of a second faster than a Porsche 996 Turbo, for the S. The Corolla reaches 60 MPH around Next Thursday. That MP is as intellectually bankrupt as our politicians over here.

I'm not saying that a Tesla Model S is zero emission, indeed no one ever did. So the entire argument is against something that Tesla never claimed. I guess if you can't make points against what people actually said, you attack stuff they might have said. But compare two equal cars for crying out loud. To be intellectually honest, this political hack needs to compare the Tesla with a top of the line Lexus, which is still slower. Geeesh.

Also, in California we don't make electricity by burning coal. "California’s total megawatt hours attributed to coal has dropped from 1 percent in 2007 to just two-tenths of one percent in 2015." (Source) So in our driving area the results swing wildly towards the Tesla, in Norway they are using primarily hydroelectric, and guess what, the electric car wins by miles. (Source) Still not zero emissions (you have to build the thing), but "zero emissions" when created by our state (I can't speak for other places) meant: "Zero emissions from the tail pipe".

[kimbottles]

>............................“Zero emission vehicles” don’t really exist.

I would argue that my various bicycles come pretty close to Zero Emissions.......

If you ignore the carbon emitted in growing, transporting and cooking your food that might be close. We also never seem to capture the environmental costs of the raw materials and manufacturing that goes into our various forms of transport.

I’m a big believer in the fact that each of us has an environmental impact and we can’t hide from it by getting energy from a plug in the wall as opposed to a pump at the gas station. Minimizing the impact where we can and making trades (ev’s make huge sense in the urban enclaves) is wise but we shouldn’t fool ourselves that cap and trade and other mechanisms makes any of us “carbon neutral”. By sheer mass, we have a tremendous impact on the earth.

Who said anything about the engine, I only said my bicycles. (Yeah, I know, I am not being reasonable.)

[LarryHoward]

>............................“Zero emission vehicles” don’t really exist.

I would argue that my various bicycles come pretty close to Zero Emissions.......

If you ignore the carbon emitted in growing, transporting and cooking your food that might be close. We also never seem to capture the environmental costs of the raw materials and manufacturing that goes into our various forms of transport.

I’m a big believer in the fact that each of us has an environmental impact and we can’t hide from it by getting energy from a plug in the wall as opposed to a pump at the gas station. Minimizing the impact where we can and making trades (ev’s make huge sense in the urban enclaves) is wise but we shouldn’t fool ourselves that cap and trade and other mechanisms makes any of us “carbon neutral”. By sheer mass, we have a tremendous impact on the earth.

Who said anything about the engine, I only said my bicycles. (Yeah, I know, I am not being reasonable.)

Well,

I’ll give you a ZEV sticker if you only coast downhill and hold your breath.

[Ajax]

So, Rich, what brand of panels is your installer using and how many? I assume you have a SolarEdge inverter system, since you have a Powerwall.

Ugh, the guy has shown me twice but I've forgotten the brand and model. I've asked him to forward me the specifics again.

[Ajax]

Beau,

Thanks for posting the link to the sea level rise tool. I'd been looking for that.
I've read a few articles recently stating that the Gulf Stream could collapse in 300 years, which is quite soon on the geologic scale. If that happens, we will experience some pretty chaotic weather and New England will be inundated, not by "sea level rise" but by new weather patterns that push the water up against the coast.

I don't pretend that EVs or the solar array makes me zero carbon. A great deal of energy goes into the mining of minerals and factories to produce these things. I've always been aware that EV's push pollution "upstream" but I've always maintained that it is easier to control and reduce emissions at a handful of large upstream points than at millions and millions of automobiles. If we recycle the materials that go into these items, it reduces the cost even further.

Oysters are known to filter the water of the bay. Millions upon millions of them can return clarity to the water. ICE-based transports are sort of like the "anti-oysters" of the planet. It's terra-forming in reverse.

I'm going solar because after the initial investment, it's less expensive in the long run. My costs will be stable, my residential power will be stable. If there really is an environmental benefit, then I'm happy to be contributing to that as well.

[Orestes Munn]

Climate, weather, and the outcomes in the biosphere seem so complicated that I don't pay much attention to any one set of predictions, other than the fact that things will get warmer, ice will melt, weather will be more intense. Most of them are so depressing and scary that I don't like reading them, anyway. It must be nice to be dumb enough to dismiss the whole thing as a conspiracy or cynical enough to favor short-term economic concerns. Faith in the young people is what keeps me going these days, but we are going to bequeath them some really serious problems.

Our PV system won't pay off for at least 6 years under current conditions. Like Rich, we bought it as a civic act...and a pretty cool gizmo.

[Ajax]

I don't share your optimism.

[Panope]

Lately, as I have been pounding all those nails, I wonder how big a "footprint" building a house leaves. I guess I am sequestering some carbon in all that wood. Probably not nearly enough to offset all the movements to get it to the job site.

Steve

[Ajax]

Lately, as I have been pounding all those nails, I wonder how big a "footprint" building a house leaves. I guess I am sequestering some carbon in all that wood. Probably not nearly enough to offset all the movements to get it to the job site.

Steve

The bigger problem you're causing, is storm water runoff.

-Install buffer vegetation around the edges of the property.
-Instead of pouring a concrete driveway, install permeable pavers to allow the water to get into the ground.
-Install rain barrels at your downspouts to capture and re-use the rain water.

[TheOffice]

Ajax,

Assumed they were Panasonic panels because of the joint venture at the battery plant. No?

[Ajax]

Ajax,

Assumed they were Panasonic panels because of the joint venture at the battery plant. No?

No, I don't think so. They're offering like, 3 different types of panels now, which is why I'm having trouble remembering. I would have remembered if they were Panasonic.

[BeauV]

We are flying to New Zealand to join up with the CCA Cruise. That will create approximately 22 tons of Carbon!

To put that in perspective, the average European creates about 10 tons of carbon per year! The average US citizen creates about 19 tons. Air travel is really the most environmentally hostile act we all participate in.

No amount of solar cells will move the needle as well as cancelling our air travel. In part, because of this, I became a serious no-travel Nazi at various companies. I managed to go from about 300,000 air miles per year as a Private Equity guy to about 60% of that.

[Panope]

Lately, as I have been pounding all those nails, I wonder how big a "footprint" building a house leaves. I guess I am sequestering some carbon in all that wood. Probably not nearly enough to offset all the movements to get it to the job site.

Steve

The bigger problem you're causing, is storm water runoff.

-Install buffer vegetation around the edges of the property.
-Instead of pouring a concrete driveway, install permeable pavers to allow the water to get into the ground.
-Install rain barrels at your downspouts to capture and re-use the rain water.

Actually, Storm water runoff is a non-issue on this project. I have carefully observed the perimeter of the property during this winters heaviest rains and not a drop has left the property. The city even let me slide by without erecting (the normally required for construction) silt fence.

The above performance happened in-spite of my storm water catchment system not yet being activated. The system will connect all the footing drains, roof downspouts, and driveway drainage to a VERY large dry-well. Not sure of the capacity, but it is likely between 10 and 20 downspout barrels worth.

A "pervious" driveway was planned/required with the permeable pavers but I have decided to go with solid concrete strips or "wagon trail" style with grass between. This is not something the city had previously approved. They thought it was a good idea and said "go for it".

Steve

Dry well is 3 feet deep and filled with washed, round rock. Drywell extends about 10' beyond what is shown in the picture.

[Olaf Hart]

https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-eco ... 4z3e9.html

[Orestes Munn]

https://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/australian-uni-develops-smaller-cheaper-battery-20180308-p4z3e9.html

alx already has one on his boat.

[Ajax]

Steve, you are awesome. I should have known better than to think for even a moment that you didn't have this all sorted out.

Olaf, I've long been concerned about the scarcity of rare earths needed to make huge quantities of lithium batteries, especially because these minerals are concentrated in nations that aren't necessarily friendly. A carbon-based battery would be an enormous step in the right direction.

[Ajax]

OM- It looks like my panels will be from Trina Solar and the inverter will be Delta.

[Tigger]

Of course, if Yellowstone ever blows, everyone to the east is screwed.

The 'hot spot' that is now in Yellowstone used to be much father west. Enormous basalt flows, numerous huge cataclysmic floods (and not long ago either), the 'scablands' ... the geographic history of the Pacific Northwest is fascinating.

Thankfully, there is a fellow who makes great You Tube videos about these topics--Nick Zentner, Professor of Geology at Washington Central University. If you are looking for an interesting corner of the internet in which to get lost with a beer--here's a great place to start!

BTW, when I wrote 'cataclysmic floods' it was not hyperbole. The volume of water from the biggest one is estimated to be ... wait for it ...WAIT FOR IT ... 10 cublic kilometers of water per hour.

Got your attention now? Check out Nick's videos!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1BFb_uYlFQ

[Ajax]

No good deed goes unpunished.

This weekend, I had no fewer than THREE Maryland park rangers/conservationists on my property, evaluating my plan to remove a single tree, plant 12 replacement trees, and establish a solar power plant. They gave it an unofficial green thumb's up and we all proceeded to cut down the single, medium sized/medium age silver maple that impedes solar energy production.

According to the USDA, silver maples although useful, have limitations and have been overplanted. We're removing this tree and replaced it with a cutoff from the storied "Wye Oak" of Maryland: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wye_Oak. My personal Ranger has also planted a variety of native understory trees to complement the oak. All of this, combined with the solar array will more than make up for the sacrifice of this one maple.

As we were finishing up for the day, I had one elderly woman walk by and start sucking her teeth at me and "awww-ing" over the loss of the tree. I explained the entire plan and she seemed satisfied and went on her way.

Another extremely elderly woman neighbor came out a short time later and began yelling at me from her fence. I walked over to address any concerns she might have and learned never to let facts get in the way of a good argument: She didn't care that I had 3 state conservationists vet our plan. She didn't care that we planted 12 other trees. She didn't care or even believe how much pollution that my solar plant will offset. The only thing that mattered, was that this old biddie has lived in the neighborhood for 55 years and watched that tree grow up and now it's gone. According to her: "You never, ever cut a tree down. I'm a nature lover."

Finally, I just had to stop her and tell her- This is my property, it's my tree and it's none of your business. What we are doing, is part of a careful plan that will yield a better environmental result over the long term. She didn't like that.

My Ranger and her two friends and I all took a walk down the street to the beach, to show it to them. As we walked past the woman's house, the other two rangers noted that she has FOUR cords of stacked firewood in her yard that she burns in her fireplace and woodstove all winter long. They looked at me and said "Where does she think all that firewood comes from?!" The enormous hypocrisy of this, really elevated my blood pressure by 10 points.

All I can say is, thank God I don't live in an HOA and can do as I damn well please, within the confines of the state and county laws.

[Orestes Munn]

You should have heard my neighbors pissing and moaning on the listserve about how unreliable PEPCO was after every one of our frequent blackouts and then going all silly when PEPCO was threatened with legal/legislative action and started investing in reliability, i.e., clearing their lines.

The firewood is just road kill.